Hi Michael,
On 08.06.2016 10:18, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
This patch try to parse name=userdata,size=-,uuid=${uuid_gpt_userdata};
gpt mmc write 0 $partitions
gpt mmc verify 0 $partitions
Signed-off-by: Michael Trimarchi <[email protected]>
---
cmd/gpt.c | 13 +++++++++++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmd/gpt.c b/cmd/gpt.c
index 8ffaef3..3d9706b 100644
--- a/cmd/gpt.c
+++ b/cmd/gpt.c
@@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ static int set_gpt_info(struct blk_desc *dev_desc,
disk_partition_t *parts;
int errno = 0;
uint64_t size_ll, start_ll;
+ lbaint_t offset = 0;
debug("%s: lba num: 0x%x %d\n", __func__,
(unsigned int)dev_desc->lba, (unsigned int)dev_desc->lba);
@@ -296,8 +297,14 @@ static int set_gpt_info(struct blk_desc *dev_desc,
}
if (extract_env(val, &p))
p = val;
- size_ll = ustrtoull(p, &p, 0);
- parts[i].size = lldiv(size_ll, dev_desc->blksz);
+ if ((strcmp(p, "-") == 0)) {
+ /* remove first usable lba and last block */
+ parts[i].size = dev_desc->lba - 34 - 1 - offset;
Looking into part_efi.c the last_usable block is dev_desc->lba - 34 and
the first usable block is 34. So 34 needs to be substracted twice,
otherwise you hit the "Partitions layout exceds disk size" error case in
part_efi.c
+ } else {
+ size_ll = ustrtoull(p, &p, 0);
+ parts[i].size = lldiv(size_ll, dev_desc->blksz);
+ }
+
free(val);
/* start address */
@@ -310,6 +317,8 @@ static int set_gpt_info(struct blk_desc *dev_desc,
free(val);
}
+ offset += parts[i].size + parts[i].start;
This appears to be wrong. We have two cases here:
a) start is not specified for parition i
In this case the code works as parts[i].start is 0 and size accumulates
to the proper offsets
b) start is specified for a partition i, example table:
part[0].size = 10
part[1].size = 10
part[1].start = 10
part[2].size = 10
This table should end up in the same table as if part[1].start = 10
would have been omited. In fact it will lead to:
part[0] = 0-10
part[1] = 10-20
part[2] = 30-40
So it introduced a gap, because start is assumed to be relative to
previous offset, which is not the case.
I think the proper handling would be:
if (parts[i].start)
offset = parts[i].size + parts[i].start;
else
offset += parts[i].size;
+
/* bootable */
if (found_key(tok, "bootable"))
parts[i].bootable = 1;
While preparing a patch to fix the previously mentioned issues, so that
gpt writing becomes usable again, I started to wonder why you added this
patch at all. In fact the usecase you describe in the commit message did
work perfectly without this patch, because part_efi.c automatically
scales a partition without given size to the available space, in case it
is the last partition. (See:
http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=disk/part_efi.c;h=01f71bee79e2656a295ee1cd3505185efc9c5cf7;hb=HEAD#l447)
So imho this patch should simply be reverted or did I miss something
important?
Regards,
Julian
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
